LC.113 



ADDRESS 



OP THE 



CATHOLIC CAY CITIZENS, 



OP 



THE CITY AND COUNTY OF PHILADELPHIA, 

TO 

THEIR FELLOW-CITIZENS, 

IN REPLY TO THE PRESENTMENT OF THE GRAND JURY 

OF THE 

Court of (|uai*ler iSesisioiis ofUKay Term 1 844, 
IN REGARD TO THE CAUSES 

OF THE 

LATE RIOTS IN PHILADELPHIA. 



PHILJIDELPHLI 

PKlNlEi) tiY M, FlTIllAN, 72 NOllTll .'^EUUIN I • ^I Ui,!- I 



ADDRESS 



OF THE 



CATHOLIC LAY CITIZENS. 



THE CITY AND COUNTY OF PHILADELPHIA, 



TO 



THEIR FELLOW-CITIZENS, 



IN REPLY TO THE PRESENTMENT OF THE GRAND JURY 



OF THE 



Conrt of Quarter Sessions of IMEay Term 1844* 



IN REGARD TO THE CAUSES 



<^ 



OF THE 



LATE RIOTS IN PHILADELPHIA. 



UJ . .- ■ iA . 



PHILADELPHIA 

PRINTED BY M. FITHIAN, 72 NORTH SECOND STREET. 



\% 



1844. 



H '*- 



TO THE PUBLIC. 



At a meeting of Catholic citizens of Philadelphia, held at the 
Cathedral on the evening of June 18th, 1844— the Hon, ARCHIBALD 
RANDALL was called to the chair, and William A. Stokes was ap- 
pointed Secretary. 

On motion of Dr. J. G. Nancrede, seconded by Professor W. E. 
Horner, it was 

Resolved, That a committee of five, including the Chairman and Se- 
cretary, be appointed to prepare an address in answer to the present- 
ment of the Grand Jury. 

Dr. Nancrede, Mr. Charles Repplier, and Dr. F. S. Eckard, were 
named as members of the Committee. 

June 20th, 1844. 

At an adjourned meeting, William A. Stokes, from the Committee 
appointed at a previous meeting, reported an address which was read, 
and on motion of Mr. Lewis Ryan, seconded by Mr. D. Eagle, it was 
unanimously 

Resolved, That the address be approved, adopted, and published. 



ADDRESS 



OF THE 

CATHOLIC LAITY OF PHILADELPHIA. 



Fellow-Citizens : — The calamities which have recently befallen 
us, are already known to you all, through the public papers, which 
have also made you somewhat acquainted with their immediate occa- 
sion. It was thought proper by the Honorable Court of Quarter Ses- 
sions, to direct the attention of the Grand Jury of May Term, to these 
events ; and to request of them a full and accurate investigation of 
their causes ; in consequence of which, they examined a number of 
witnesses, and at length, on the 15th inst.,made a presentment, signed 
by seventeen of their number. 



We must confess our surprise at the avowal of the Grand Jury, in 
the presentment, that they necessarily depended on " Ex parte evi~ 
dence" in the investigation of public facts regarding the community at 
large, into which it was plainly their duty to inquire most fully, 
as they were instructed by the Court, and encouraged to do, with assur- 
ances of protection to all witnesses whose attendance might be sought 
or offered. 

We conceive that it was their duty to hear the evidence on both 
sides, in regard to all facts connected with the late riots, and we regret 
that " ex parte evidence^' should have been received in a matter of 
public interest, where no bill of indictment nor any particular charge 
had been laid before them. 

They seem to have assumed that one party were rioters and the 
other the assailed, and to have consequently, taken the evidence of the 
latter, without summoning the others before them to hear their accounts 
of the transaction, and thus, we are not surprised, at the result of their 
investigations. Speaking of the causes which led to the riots, the 
Grand Jmy ascribe them — 

" To the efforts of a portion of the community to exclude the Bible 
from our Public Schools. The Jury are of opinion that these efforts 
in some measure gave rise to the formation of a new party, which 
called and held public meetings in the District of Kensington, in the 
peaceful exercise of the sacred rights and privileges guaranteed to every 
citizen by the Constitution and laws of our State and Country. These 
meetings were rudely disturbed and fired upon by a band of lawless ir- 
responsible men, some of whom had resided in our country only for a 
short period. This outrage, causing the death of a number of our un- 
offending citizens, led to immediate retaliation, and was followed up 
by subsequent acts of aggression in violation and open defiance of all 
law." 

We regret that the Grand Jury had not the moral courage to utter, 
in distinct terms, what they are now avowed and admitted to have 
meant. They have, in the paragraph just quoted, without using the 
name Catholic, wantonly charged that denomination with " an attempt 
to exclude the Bible from the Public Schools," and they have also, 
though more guardedly, insinuated, that they " have attempted to inter- 
fere with the sacred rights, and privileges guaranteed to every citizen, 
by the Constitution and Laws of our State." These charges are un- 
founded. If the Grand Jury, on what is avowed to have been " ex 
parte testimony/' came to these conclusions, it was their duty to have 
presented the names of those who constitute " the portion of the com- 
munity" with specific charges against them, to the end that they might 
be tried and punished. If they did not come to these conclusions, 
they have stated what they know to be untrue. So that, in either as- 
pect, the Grand Jury, both in the manner of its investigations and con- 



4 

elusions, has given great reason for complaint, not only to the 60,000 
citizens whom they have condemned without a hearing, but to every 
man in the community who respects the laws and desires that its ad- 
ministrators shall be both wise and pure. 

In the name and in behalf of the Catholic community, we explicit- 
ly deny that they have at any time, or in any manner made any effort 
" to exclude the Bible from the Public Schools." In the most solemn 
manner we declare that they have never designed, desired, or .attempt- 
ed to exclude the Bible from the Schools. We have uniformly con- 
tended, not only for ourselves, but on behalf of our Protestant and 
Jewish brethren, for the fullest freedom of conscience both for children 
and adults in Schools or elsewhere. 

We confidently refer to the letter of the Right Eev. the Bishop of 
Philadelphia, to the Controllers of the Public Schools, dated 14th No- 
vember, 1842, as evidence that the Catholic body, in whose name he 
spoke, only asked the liberty of using the version of the Bible, ap- 
proved of and authorised in their own communion. Speaking of the 
School regulations he says — 

" Among them (the regulations) I am informed one is, that the 
teachers shall read, and cause to be read, the Bible ; by which is un- 
derstood the version published by command of King James. To this 
regulation we are forced to object, inasmuch as Catholic children are 
thus led to view as authoritative, a version which is rejected by the 
Church. It is not expected that I should state in detail the reason of 
this rejection. I shall only say, that we are persuaded that several 
books of Divine Scripture are wanting in that version, and that the mean- 
ing of the original text is not faithfully expressed. It is not incum- 
bent on us to prove either position, since we do not ask you to adopt 
the Catholic version for general use ; but we feel warranted in claim- 
ing that our conscientious scruples to recognise or use the other, be re- 
spected. In Baltimore, the Directors of the Public Schools have 
thought it their duty to provide Catholic children with the Catholic 
version. Is it too much for us to expect the same measure of justice ?" 

From this it is clear that no attempt was made by the Catholic body, 
or their official and authorised representative, " to exclude the Bible 
from the Schools." The use, by themselves, of their own version was 
asked. In a neighboring city, where the Catholic faith prevails, and 
where peace and harmony on this subject have always existed, Catho- 
lics use their own Bible, and Protestants theirs. In the capital of the 
ancient Catholic province of Maryldnd — the city of Baltimore, both 
sides are protected, and neither side is oppressed. 

The Board of Control, acceded to the Bishop's request, but with a 
restriction which virtually nullified the concession, by adopting the 
following Resolutions — 

^^ Resolved, That no children be required to attend or unite in the 
reading of the Bible in the Public Schools, whose parents are conscien- 
tiously opposed thereto. 



" Resolved, That those children whose parents conscientiously pre- 
fer and desire any particular version of the Bible, without note or com- 
ment, be furnished with the same." 

Although the words " without note or comment" excluded the Ca- 
tholic version, which is always accompanied by a few notes, the Bi- 
shop, or the Catholic community, made no complaint, being content 
that the children were exempted from the use of the version to which 
they were conscientiously opposed, and relying on the good faith of 
the Directors, and teachers, to execute the regulations of the Board. 
No further action was had on this subject on the part of the Catholics, 
until the month of March of the present year, when a pamphlet pur- 
porting to be a reply to the letter of Bishop Kemick was published by 
Rev. W. Colton, Chaplain in the United States Navy, Editor of a vio- 
lent political newspaper, and a leading member of " the Protestant 
Association." In the mean time it had been ascertained that the regu- 
lations were not attended to in several or most of the Schools, and that 
the consciences of Catholic teachers and children were aggrieved, in 
many instances, by attempts to force them to use the Protestant 
VERSION. Under those circumstances, perceiving that an eiFort was 
made to set at nought the regulations of the Board of Control, ^and to 
force the consciences of Catholics, a number of Catholic laymen ad- 
dressed a respectful petition to the Board of Control, praying for the 
enforcement of their own regulations, and a similar address was made 
by the Bishop ; on which occasion the Board adopted resolutions re- 
quiring their observance by the teachers under penalty of a forfeiture 
of salary. 

At that very time, when we were respectfully petitioning not to be 
excluded from the enjoyment of our undoubted constitutional rights, 
the cry was raised that the Catholics were laboring " to banish the 
Bible." This unfounded charge was met by a prompt disclaimer pub- 
lished by the Bishop, in all the city papers on the 1 3th day of March. 
From this document we beg leave to submit the following extract : — 

" Catholics have not asked that the Bible be excluded from the Pub- 
lic Schools. They have merely desired for their children the liberty of 
using the Catholic version in case the reading of the Bible be prescribed 
by the Controllers or Directors of the Schools. They only desire to 
enjoy the benefit of the Constitution of the State of Pennsylvania, 
which guarantees the rights of conscience, and precludes any prefer- 
ence of sectarian modes of worship. They ask that the School laws 
be faithfully executed, and that " the religious predilections of the pa- 
rents be respected." They ask that the regulations of the Controllers 
of the Public Schools, adopted in December, 1834, be followed up, 
and that the resolutions of the same body adopted in January, 1843, 
be adhered to. They desire that the Public Schools be preserved from 
all sectarian influence, and that education be conducted in a way that 
may enable all citizens equally to share in its benefits, without any vio- 
lence being ofiered to their religious convictions." 

1* 



These were the only measures adopted by the Catholic community, 
or by their official representative, in reference to the use of the Bible ; 
and shew that they limited their request to the liberty of using their 
own version, and did not in any way interfere with the use of the Pro- 
testant version by such as chose to adopt it. In this age and country, 
and especially in the city to which William Penn gave the name and 
impress of brotherly love, we presume it is unnecessary to put forward 
any plea in support of the constitutional and legal right to have our reli- 
gious predilections respected. Freedom of conscience is a fundamen- 
tal article of the social compact which we are bound to maintain, and 
we cannot consent to see it violated, in ourselves, or our fellow-citi- 
zens. We appeal to all whether we do not scrupulously respect it in 
all the various relations of life. In this regard at least, we feel no re- 
proach of conscience. We fearlessly challenge any one to show any 
act of the Catholic community in violation of these sacred rights, and 
we can individually make a like appeal as to all our social transactions. 
We have cherished and loved our fellow-citizens as brothers bound to- 
gether by social ties, which for us, were strengthened and hallowed by 
a religion which preaches submission to constituted authority, and love 
for all mankind. 

We have heard it affirmed that because Catholics are a minority, they 
must submit to the regulations which the majority may please to adopt. 
We are willing that the principle should be applied to all things where- 
in public interest and order are concerned, saving always those princi- 
ples and rights which the Constitution holds to be inviolable. We are 
the minority : and for us, therefore, does the Constitution exist. The 
majority need not its protection, for they have the power to take care 
of their own interests. Unless for the shield which tile Constitution 
gives to those who are the smaller, and, therefore, the weaker party, 
this government would be a despotism, for the governing power would 
be uncontrolled. To-day one class may be lashed by the tyrant of 
numbers, and to-morrow another class may feel the scourge. No man, 
no sect, no party, would ever be safe. Peace and order would be de- 
stroyed, and soon the wreck of the Republic would add another to the 
many melancholy instances of the danger which always attends the 
conferring of unbounded power. 

Under no circumstances is Conscience at the disposal of a ma- 
jority. It is the feeling of a duty which springs from the law of na- 
ture engraved on the heart, or from the revealed law of God, and can- 
not be subject to the control of any authority not immediately derived 
from Him. We plead then our natural and indefeasible right recog- 
nized by the Constitution and laws, and we are happy to add, by the 
Board of Control itself in the regulations adopted in the year 1833, 
long before the agitation of this question. We beg leave to submit 
them to our fellow-citizens : 



" Whereas, The Controllers have noticed that the practice exists in 
some of the Schools of introducing religious exercises, and books of a 
religious character, which have not been recommended or adopted by 
this Board in the lessons prepared for the use of the scholars, and be- 
lieving the use of such exercises or books may have a tendency to pro- 
duce an influence in the Schools of a sectarian character — 

It is Resolved, That this Board, as conservators of the rights of pa- 
rents or guardians of children, committed to the care of Teachers, em- 
ployed according to law, for the purpose of public education, are bound 
to preserve those rights unimpaired. 

Resolved, That the Constitution of the State of Pennsylvania, which 
has provided for the establishment of Public Schools, has also wisely 
guaranteed the right of all to worship according to the dictates of their 
conscience; and as the parents of children have both by law and nature 
the'guardianship of them during their minority, so, they alone are re- 
sponsible for the eiFect of such guardianship, and their right to impress 
the minds of their children with such views of a religious nature as they 
may think most important, ought not to be interfered with, especially 
by a body exercising its authority by virtue of the laws of the Com- 
monwealth. 

Resolved, That as all sects contribute in the payment of taxes to the 
support of the Public Schools, the introduction of any religious or sec- 
tarian forms as part of the discipline of the School, must have a ten- 
dency to impair the rights of some — and that whilst this Board is con- 
vinced of the vitter impossibility of adopting a system of religious in- 
struction that should meet the approbation of all religious societies, 
they are equally satisfied no injury need result to the pupils from con- 
fining the instruction in our schools to the ordinary branches of elemen- 
tary education; insomuch as ample facilities for religious improvement 
are presented for the choice of parents or guardians, in Sabbath Schools, 
and other establishments for that purpose, which are organized and sup- 
ported by various religious communities. 

Resolved, That the ground of universal benevolence is one on which 
all sects or parties may meet; and it must be on this ground alone, that 
our Public Schools can be continued as a Public good ; and in prohib- 
iting the introduction of religious forms in them, this Board will invade 
the rights of none, but on the contrary, by so doing, it will maintain the 
rights of all, and therefore 

Resolved, That this Board cannot but consider the introduction or 
use of any religious exercises, books, or lessons into the Public Schools, 
which have not been adopted by the Board, as contrary to law; and the 
use of any such religious exercises, books or lessons, is hereby directed 
to be discontinued." 

With regard to the connexion of the question concerning the use of 
the Bible, with the organization among us of a new political party, it is 
not for us to question the correctness of the conclusions at which the 
Grand Jury have arrived. For ourselves, we repeat, that we sought 
only liberty of education as connected with liberty of conscience — ^the 
birth-right of freemen. We sought it by respectful addresses to the 
legal authorities. We asked that our children, in approaching the foun- 
tains of public education, should be permitted to drink of its waters 
without any admixture. We wished to leave them as their most pre- 
cious inheritance, the faith which we received from our fathers, or em- 



8 

braced from deep conviction of its truth ; and in committing them to 
the public teachers, we claimed what God commands, what the law 
guarantees, that our parental rights to guard their religious sentiments 
should not be infringed. If this has given rise to a new political party, 
we deeply regret that any party should exist in this country hostile to 
Itberty of conscience. But we disclaim the intention of throwing this 
stigma on any party. 

We yield to none of our fellow-citizens in attachment to republican 
institutions, we owe no allegiance whatever to foreign prince or poten- 
tate; the obedience which as children of the church, we render to the 
chief Bishop, regards not the things that appertain to this world. 

As Catholics, we are free in our political sentiments, uninfluenced 
by our religious tenets or by our spiritual guides. We belong to differ- 
ent political parties, according to our judgment and choice, and we 
have political opinions and predilections over which we acknowledge 
no control, other than the constitutional and legal restrictions. We do 
not object to the formation of any new party, which respects the Con- 
stitution and laws, and pursues its objebts without infringing on rights 
already guaranteed and public faith and the dictates of natural justice 
and humanity. But if any party takes its rise in opposition to the 
peaceable efforts of citizens to protect and preserve the rights of con- 
science to the growing youth of our country, it is of ill omen to our 
peace and prosperity. We trust that the Grand Jury has been mistaken 
in tracing its origin ; but we pretend not to decide the question, for our 
desire is, not to attack others, but to defend ourselves. 

The Grand Jury state that " the meetings of this party were rudely 
disturbed and fired upon by a band of lawless, irresponsible men." This 
statement, made on "ex parte evidence," is strongly denied by many 
who assert that they were eye-witnesses of the transaction, and who 
would willingly have given evidence before the Grand Jury had they 
been summoned for that purpose. For ourselves, we await the public 
trials, in which we hope to see the testimonies weighed, the facts 
placed beyond question, the guilty punished, and the innocent dis- 
charged. 

In the meantime we would observe that we are credibly informed, 
and firmly believe, that Irish Catholics did not go to the meeting of the 
6th of May, which'unfortunately adjourned to the market-house, where 
the first collision took place, and that the first death occurred at the 
time when the houses were being sacked, the second when the school- 
house was being put on fire. The conflict of the following day was 
not sought for. The Catholics remained at their homes, until the arri- 
val of the immense crowd which had illegally met at the State House 
Square, " armed for defence," and had adjourned to the scene of the 
preceding conflict. We however disclaim all sympathy for the men, 
whoever they may have been, who rudely disturbed any public meeting; 



we detest, with all our hearts, the crime of murder by whomsoever per- 
petrated ; we deeply regret the loss of human life, in whatever way it 
occurred ; and we leave to the public law, all who have been guilty of 
shedding human blood wantonly and maliciously. We care not to dis- 
pute the allegations at the present time, but await the calm action of 
public justice. 

That no man may be sacrificed to passion or prejudice, it is wisely 
provided, that he shall only be condemned, after a full and fair trial, 
on the verdict of twelve citizens. 

It would be most unjust on the presumption, or "prima facie" evi- 
dence of guilt of a small band of men, to visit their offence on an en- 
tire community, from the mere accidental circumstance that most of 
them are said to hold the religious faith which we profess. If outrage 
and violence have been committed, let the law have its course ; but in 
the meantime, let not the common bonds of society be snapped asunder; 
let not the peaceful and unoffending be thrown into consternation by 
menaces of vengeance ; let not the Sanctuaries of Religionbe darkened 
with the gloom of anticipated destruction ; on the contrary, let peace 
and good will, and charity, be cherished, and let us all endeavour to 
bind more strongly the social ties which cannot be loosed without dan- 
ger and detriment to ourselves and to om- national institutions. 

For om-selves, and the Catholic community at large, we deprecate 
all violence, intimidation, and other illegal means of checking the ex- 
pression of public sentiment, and the exercise of political privileges. 
We wish the right of assembling peaceably to be guarded with jealousy, 
but we confess our alarm for the safety of our civil institutions, when 
public meetings are called, and invited to come " armed for defence." 

We forbear, fellow-citizens, entering into further details. We com- 
plain not of the soft tones and delicate phrases in which the Grand Jury 
has hinted at the burning of two churches, one of them within the 
city, and far removed from the scene of riot; the residence of the cler- 
gy, and a house of education ; a Presbytery, that, when pestilence 
overspread the land, received within its walls the afflicted, without re- 
gard to their creed ; of a library of great value ; of ancient paintings, 
which had existed through ages in the old world, to become models of 
art in the new world ; of the threats uttered and the attempts made to 
burn all our churches ; we will even repress our indignation of the con- 
duct of those who burned the letters and papers, and picture of George 
Washington, preserved with religious care in the Church of St. Au- 
gustine, of which he was one of the earliest benefactors. — The Grand 
Jury complaisantly alludes to all these as " acts of retaliation." Re- 
taliation against whom"? Is any one reckless enough to deny that the 
Bishop, the Clergy, and the immense majority of the Catholics of the 
city and county were no parties to the disturbance of any meeting, or 



10 

any acts of lawless violence ? And yet acts of unprovoked and un- 
precedented outrage inflicted on them are called — ^retaliation ! 

We are Philadelphians, and we love our city. Many of us can say it 
is the home of our childhood, the habitation of our wives and children 
— it contains the ashes of our fathers. Willingly would we bury in 
oblivion those awful scenes, which (though painful and injurious to us,) 
we deeply deplore on higher grounds than any selfish personal feelings. 

It had been our pride and our glory that religious freedom was here 
enjoyed in its plenitude, and that any attempt to diminish it would 
meet with the reprobation and successful opposition of all classes of ci- 
tizens. 

Here we fondly hoped the shrines of religion were safe ; here the 
seminaries of learning were fostered ; here the ministers of religion 
were respected. Alas ! after the scenes through which we have passed, 
when even the resting place of the dead was invaded, can we speak 
the same language of exultation ? We trust still in the good sense and 
feeling of our fellow-citizens, that they will unite with us in main- 
taining that liberty of conscience, for which our fathers and theirs 
bled, and the supremacy of the law, and that the sympathies of life 
will be renewed and increased among us ; so that united by the bonds 
of our social compact and common interests, and common country in 
peace and harmony, we shall continue to enjoy the blessings of which 
we have hitherto been proud ; and in the day of danger we shall all 
remember, that life is well sacrificed, if sacrificed for our country. 

We desire not to proscribe any one ; we ask for no peculiar privi- 
leges ; we make no merit of the purity of our Pennsylvania descent, 
but WE DEMAND that the exclamation, " I am an American Citizen," 
shall continue to be the protection of our rights, and the guarantee of 
our freedom. 

ARCH. RANDALL, Chairman. 

William A. Stokes, Secretary. 

In support of the principal facts stated in the foregoing address, we 
refer to the following letters from Protestant Directors of the Public 
Schools. 

Philadelphia, JcNE 19, 1844. 

Gentlemen : The recent presentment of the Grand Jury assigned 
as one cause of the late riots : " The efforts made by a portion of the 
community to exclude the Bible from the Public Schools." 

Will you be good enough to state as Directors of the Public Schools 
of the City of Philadelphia, whether as far as the Roman Catholics are 
concerned, they have asked for the exclusion of the Bible from the Public 
Schools ; whether ihey have ever interfered with the use of the Pro- 
testant version of the Scriptures by Protestant children, and if with 
reference to the Bible they have not simply asked for their own chil- 
dren, permission to use that version of the Bible which, as a matter of 
conscience, they prefer. 

As members of various Protestant communions, you cannot be sus- 
pected of any undue feeling towards the Religious denomination re- 
ferred to. 

We remain, &c. Frederick S. Eokard, 

Joseph Donath, 
Jno. Keating, 
Robert Ewing. 



11 

Messrs. Frederick S. Eckard and others : 

Gentlemen: In answer to the request contained in your note, that 
I would state "whether as far as Roman Catholics are concerned, they 
have asked for the exclusion of the Bible from the Public Schools," I 
reply, that, to my knowledge as a Director of the Public Schools of 
the City of Philadelphia, and a Controller of those of both City and 
County, (which office I have held for several years,) no such request 
has ever been made, nor do I know of any efforts on their part with 
the alleged object in view. The Records of the Board of Control will 
show the purpose to have been such as is mentioned in your note. 

It is proper to add, that there may have been efforts on the part of 
individuals belonging to the Roman Catholic communion, to exclude 
the Bible from the Schools, of which I know nothing. None how- 
ever, have been manifested before either the Directors or Controllers 
referred to, nor have come to my knowledge as an individual. 
With much respect and regard, 

G. M. Wharton. 
Philadelphia, June 19, 1844. 
As Directors of the Public Schools, we concur in the above. 

J. C. Fisher, 
Ch. Gibbons. 
Philadelphia, June 20, 1844. 
Gentlemen : In reply to your communication of the 19th instant, we 
state as Directors of the Public Schools of the City of Philadelphia, 
that Roman Catholics have not, to our knowledge, asked for the exclu- 
sion of the Bible from the Public Schools. That they have not inter- 
fered with the use of the Protestant version of the Scriptures by Protes- 
tant children ; and finally, that, with reference to the Bible, they have 
simply asked for their own children, permission to use that version of 
the Bible, which as a matter of conscience, they prefer. 
Respectfully, &c. 

George W. Biddle, 
Wm. W. Moore, 
John F. Gilpin, 
Edward Hopper. 
To Messrs. F. S. Eckard, Joseph Donath, John Keating, Robert 
Evving. 

Philadelphia, June 18th 1844. 
Dear Sir: You have directed my attention to a part of the present- 
ment made by the Grand Jury for May, 1844, in which one of the 
exciting causes of the scenes of riot and bloodshed so recently exhibit- 
ed, is said to have been " the efforts of a portion of the community to 
exclude the Bible from our Public Schools;" and you have requested 
me as being in some measure cognizant of the circumstances, having 
been a Director of Public Schools in the First Section (the City) during 
the last four years, to state whether the above supposed allusion to a 
large and respectable denomination of Christians, has to the best of my 
knowledge, any foundation in truth. Without feeling disposed to 
assent to the conclusions so logically deduced by the Grand Jury in 
the sequence of facts and inferences which they have put forth to the 
public, I take great pleasure in briefly relating a few circumstances 
which I think will clearly show that as far as the City of Philadelphia 
is concerned, the imputation attempted to be fastened upon the popula- 
tion, is wholly unfounded. 



12 

In the Spring 1842, whilst I had the honor to sit in the Board of 
Directors for this section, a case occurred in a neighboring sect-r^a 
growing out of the use of a version of the Scriptures in tlie schools, 
not recognized as the true one by all denominations, which enlisted 
my feelings from its involving what I thought a violation of the civil 
and religious liberty guaranteed by the Constitution to every individual. 
With a view therefore to prevent a similar occurrence in the first sec- 
• tion to which I was attached, and supposing the opportunity favorable 
to calm and rational discussion, as we in the City at least had not yet 
pledged ourselves to proscription, I introduced inio ihe Board of Direc- 
tors two or three resolutions which proposed to disuse ihe Bible as a 
class book in the schools. My motives for so doing were not confined 
to the single view of the case then presented, bearing only upon a por- 
tion of the community, but were intended to provide against any simi- 
lar contingency which might in future bring religious opinion into col- 
lision with the acknowledged right of all to the benefit of a common 
fund. In preparing therefore the resolutions, as their object was one 
of peculiar remedy, nor their spirit a passing one, 1 consulted no mem- 
ber of the religious persuasion to which they were then chiefly appli- 
cable, upon the step I was about to take ; nay further, as innovation 
always subjects its author to severe and often deserved censure, I con- 
cluded that it would be better to adopt the exclusive palernity of the 
measure, and allow it to rest upon its real or supposed merits alone, 
when introduced for discussion. This was so much the fact, that a 
a seconder to the resolutions had not even been provided, when 
brought before the consideration of the Board ; as 1 trusted to the love 
of fair play and freedom of discussion which characterize most of our 
public bodies. The subject was regulaily debated, and the Board by a 
nearly unanimous vote negatived the resolutions, five gentlemen only 
voting with the mover in the affirmative. Amongst these six but one 
was a Catholic, and I undeistood at the time, though for the accuracy 
of the report I cannot answer, that he regretted that the mailer had been 
broached. 

Such is a brief outline of what has occurred in the first section of 
this school,district, during my term of membership, and ii has been given 
without comment upon the course then pursued. This is not the time 
or place for extended remarks upon it ; your and my intention now is 
to present the public with the naked truth, and lo prevent its perversion 
in a very important particular. I trust as far as ihe city of Philadel- 
phia is concerned this object is effected^ for so far from there being a Ca- 
tholic conspiracy here to exclude the Bible from the public schools, the 
first motion was made by persons disconnected with Catholics, and 
without their co-operation. 

In dismissing the matter, I will add, that as almost every communi- 
cation upon this much vexed question, has begun or concluded with 
an avowal of the purity of the writer's Protestant descent, or his incon- 
trovertible right to be claimed as a Native American botn and bred, 
may I be permitted to say, instead, in the language of Mr. Burke, that 
in America every man has the right, particularly in the discussion of 
doctrinal subjects, to the benefit of "The Protestantism of the Protes- 
tant Religion, and to the dissidence of dissent." 
I am, very truly, yours, 

George W. Biddle. 
Dr. Frederick Eckard. 



030 218 993 6 | 



